|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
One point I find most interesting is the Democrats efforts to block oil exploration to lessen our dependance on Middle Eastern Oil, while they crticize our dependance, the oil companies and offer no solution.
|
ace....you're showin' off your huevos.....I suspect that you know that the opposite of what you are saying has been documented by me in this thread:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=108585
At three posts at these links:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...7&postcount=39
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...7&postcount=47
Quote:
Arco Solar, Solarex Corp (NAICS: 333414, 333611 ) , SOLAREX CORP, STANDARD OIL CO (INDIANA)
Lueck, Thomas J.
New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Oct 16, 1983. pg. A.18
New York Times Company Oct 16, 1983
The Sun, long a source of power in mythology, may soon be an actual source of household electricity - at least in bright places like America's Sun Belt. But some of the people working to develop the cells that generate electricity from sunlight are concerned that the oil business is controlling more and more of the solar industry.
This trend was highlighted last month when the Standard Oil Company of Indiana purchased Solarex, a Rockville, Md., company that last year ranked as the second largest United States manufacturer of photovoltaic cells. Arco Solar, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Atlantic Richfield Company, was the largest. Ranking third was the Solar Power Corporation, owned by Exxon.
<b>''Virtually all of the photovoltaics industry is owned by Big Oil,'' said Scott Sklar, political director for the Solar Lobby</b>, an organization that advocates expanding development of solar technology. ''And the problem with that is these huge corporations don't have the kind of commitment you find in small innovative companies.'' Some consumer groups profess even greater worries about the oil industry's motives. <b>''The major oils see solar power as a competing source of energy, and they want to control it and slow it down,''</b> said Edwin Rothchild, a spokesman for the Citizen Energy Labor Coalition, another lobbying organization. But many experts in alternative energy research maintain that, if not for large investments by the oil companies, photovoltaic development would be grinding to a halt. ''If the oil companies are a menace, they are the most benevolent menace you could find, because nobody else seems willing to spend a dime,'' said Mitchell Diamond, an energy analyst for Booz Allen and Hamilton, Inc., a consulting firm.
Solarex, which was formed in 1973, lost $10 million in 1982. John Corsi, its president, said the company had been aggressively but unsuccessfully seeking a fresh infusion of cash from outside sources since March. He added that a merger with Amoco, which already held 35 percent of Solarex's stock, became the only alternative. Amoco, which paid $20 a share for a piece of Solarex in 1982, acquired the 65 percent of the company's shares it did not already own last month for only $2.50 a share, or a total of $12.2 million.
So far, the photovoltaic cells introduced to the world market are producing a minuscule amount of power compared to other electrical generating equipment. Mr. Diamond estimated sales of photovoltaic cells in 1982 at $90 million, an increase of 180 percent in two years. But he said these devices were capable of generating a total of only 9 megawatts of electricity, compared to the more than 500 megawatts generated by a single conventional power plant.
''We remain convinced that we can be competitive with coal-fired plants in the Sun Belt by 1990,'' said James H. Caldwell, senior vice president for manufacturing and research at Arco Solar. Atlantic Richfield does not disclose the financial status of its solar company, and Mr. Caldwell declined to say if the company has been profitable or how much money it is spending on research and development.
As the largest manufacturer of photovoltaic cells, Arco Solar specializes in a cell designed to recharge batteries. Other American companies are selling larger cells designed to generate power in remote locations not served by other sources of electricity, such as farms and villages in developing countries. Some Japanese companies, meanwhile, have begun marketing pocket calculators and digital watches powered by tiny cells.
Despite his own company's goals, Mr. Caldwell acknowledged that others in the field may be forced to scale down. The most important products of the industry ''will require a very high level of investment, and people aren't exactly knocking down doors to invest'' he said.
<h3>Throughout most of the 1970's, the Federal Government functioned as one of the largest sources of photovoltaic research money. Those funds have been sharply reduced. In 1980, the Department of Energy administered $797 million in research and development grants for renewable energy projects. This year, those grants have fallen to $262 million.
Several major corporations outside the oil industry have either withdrawn from photovoltaic research or put it on the back burner.</h3> The RCA Corporation, which was a leader in research aimed at the most advanced forms of photovoltaic cells, sold its technology to Solarex earlier this year for an undisclosed price. Texas Instruments Corporation, which spent $20 million of its own and Federal money on a major photovoltaics research project for which many experts held high hopes, suspended work in the area two weeks ago.
Despite successful initial results of the project, Texas Instruments ''decided not to spend the $100 million that would be needed over the next four years'' to develop manufacturing techniques for its photovoltaic cells, said Richard Purdue, a company spokesman. Such decisions are what lead observers of the industry to say that a continued infusion of cash by the oil companies is essential.
At Solarex, Mr. Corsi said it will take ''very, very deep pockets to stay ahead of photovoltaics technology; we are fortunate that the oil companies are standing in.''
|
The last link to one of my post contains this:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...2&postcount=49
Quote:
DANIEL S. GREENBERG
WASHINGTON
Metro; PART-B; Metro Desk
Los Angeles Times (pre-1997 Fulltext). Los Angeles, Calif.: Aug 13, 1990. pg. 3
Daniel S. Greenberg is editor and publisher of Science & Government Report, a Washington-based newsletter.
Count the 1980s as the squandered decade for energy research aimed at reducing America's risky dependence on foreign oil. And credit the loss to the Reagan administration, which gutted the government's energy-research programs-and redeployed much of the savings to nuclear-weapons research. A sager Bush administration has been repairing some of the damage with selective infusions of funds. But in general, energy research remains in the fiscal doldrums.
<h3>The evisceration of the government's energy-research programs was one of the proudest achievements of the Reagan administration, which took the cheery view that the marketplace is the infallible governor of energy production, use, and innovations. Upon taking office, Reagan sought to reverse the big energy-research buildup started by Richard Nixon in response to the 1973 oil crisis and accelerated by Jimmy Carter as his domestic centerpiece.</h3> They aimed to mobilize science to squeeze more power from common fuels and guide the transition to new ones. In the hierarchy of tough research problems, these rank high, and require a lot of time and money.
When Congress thwarted Reagan's pledge to abolish the Department of Energy (DOE), <b>he responded with budget cuts that severely reduced or even eliminated the Department's various civilian energy-research programs. Congress again balked and kept them alive, but for energy research, it was the beginning of a decade of drought that has only partially lifted. The science and engineering grapevine naturally reverberates with news of hot and cold professional opportunities-with the scale invariably linked to the flow of federal money. There's still relatively little money, and therefore no stampede to energy research.
In 1980, the year before Reagan took office, DOE was budgeted for $560 million for solar-energy research and development, in its own laboratories and in universities and industry. When Reagan left office, the solar program was down to $90 million-thanks only to Congress preventing a complete wipeout. Among the items rescued from elimination was the Solar Energy Research Institute, the main federal laboratory for research in that field. The Bush budget for next year calls for a 30 percent boost in solar research, awesome by Gramm-Rudman standards, but the sum is still far below pre-Reagan levels.
Funds for coal research dropped from $755 million to $275 million during the Reagan years; conservation research from $295 million to $190 million, and research on non-solar renewable energies from $273 million to $48 million.</b> Nuclear energy received many heartfelt endorsements from the Reagan administration, which tended toward adoration of big high-tech projects. But here, too, the money record is dismal, with federal research dropping from $1.1 billion in 1980 to $340 million last year.
After a decade of plentiful petroleum, with real prices actually lower than they were 15 years ago, the zip is long gone from America's determination to use its scientific smarts for protection against oil disruptions.
This is evident in the hardpressed, financially shortsighted auto industry, which has persistently resisted higher fuel economy standards. In fact, the current average performance has declined from 28.6 miles per gallon in 1988 to 27.8 in the current model year, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
European and Japanese manufacturers, in well-financed anticipation of the next oil crisis, have demonstrated conventional-style, gasoline-powered cars that get around 100 miles per gallon.
It's a well-kept secret if any American manufacturer can match that. Japanese auto manufacturers have also concentrated on packing six cylinders worth of power into economical and smooth-running four-cylinder engines, thus positioning themselves for what may well be a new era of high-priced fuel.
The Reagan-era contention that the marketplace is best for setting research priorities fails to account for the fiscal timidity of many American industries, particularly in financing long-term research. Governments can provide that endurance. That was the purpose of the energy-research programs that the Reagan administration trampled to near-oblivion.
The Bush administration has recognized the need for a comeback. The pace could be quickened. But one can only despair over the prospects of American staying power beyond the current round of Middle East turmoil.
|
<b>The solutions haven't changed in 26 years, Ace.....it's justgot almost impossible after Carter's energy plan, designed to insulate the US quest for energy independence from "dips" in market prices that temporarily kill incentives for alternative energy R&D, and the political control by "big oil" money, to effect reverdals like the one described in the 80's, in the preceding quote box. We had an opportunity, ace, and Mr. Reagan presided offer the dismantling of our last best chance to avoid a military solution as our sole remaining recourse!</b>
Last edited by host; 10-01-2006 at 01:39 PM..
|